Posted on 10/17/2002 8:23:43 PM PDT by Nachum
Edited on 04/22/2004 12:35:02 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
UNITED NATIONS
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Friday, October 18, 2002
UNITED NATIONS — The United States, France and Russia are close to an agreement on wording for a single U.N. resolution that would spell out the consequences for Iraq if it refuses to cooperate with weapons inspectors, sources have told Fox News.
Three of the five permanent nations of the U.N. Security Council were said to be discussing new language for the resolution, with Moscow saying for the first time Friday it might agree to military action if Baghdad fails to cooperate with weapons inspections.
The new offer was designed to win support from the three permanent members of the council — France, Russia and China — who want to give Iraq a chance to cooperate with weapons inspectors without the explicit threat of force.
The Bush administration made clear there would be consequences if Iraq fails to comply with returning inspectors, and Secretary of State Colin Powell said the president already had the authorization he needed from Congress.
French diplomats were reported to be pleased with the latest U.S. offer, which eliminates the threat of using "all necessary measures" against Iraq. But there remained some concern about other phrases that could trigger military action, such as a reference to Iraq being in "material breach" if it violates any U.N. resolution.
The same legal terminology was used by the United States to take action in Kosovo in 1999 to oust Slobodan Milosevic's forces.
In Paris, French Foreign Ministry deputy spokeswoman Cecile Pozzo di Borgo said the new U.S. proposal was the subject of intense negotiations. "It's not a question today of victory for anyone," she said. "Our objective is to maintain unity within the international community and the Security Council."
The new proposal calls for inspectors to "report immediately to the council any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament," according to excerpts of the new U.S. proposal obtained by The Associated Press.
Once a failure is reported, the Security Council would convene immediately "to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all the relevant council resolutions in order to restore international peace and security."
U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the United States would agree to confer with the council then, but would not feel bound to wait for a council decision before taking action.
In Moscow, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said if weapons inspectors encounter obstacles in Iraq, the United Nations could consider passing a resolution authorizing the use of force.
"If the inspectors began to work in Iraq and in the course of this work, problems arise, the inspectors should report what problems have arisen. Then the U.N. Security Council should again consider this issue and decide whether harsher measures, right up to the use of force, are required," Ivanov said at a news conference.
It was the first time Moscow explicitly said it might at some point agree to military action. Ivanov said a day earlier that the new U.S. offer presented "favorable conditions" with which the council could work. But Russia still seemed to be pushing for a two-step approach envisioned by France and favored by many U.N. members.
Intense negotiations on Iraq began five weeks ago when Bush addressed the U.N. General Assembly and told skeptical world leaders to confront the "grave and gathering danger" posed by Iraq — or stand aside as the United States acts.
Iraq responded to the escalating threat of U.S. military action by suddenly inviting U.N. weapons inspectors to return after barring them for nearly four years. The inspectors left Baghdad in December 1998 ahead of U.S. and British airstrikes punishing Iraq for obstructing their work.
Inspectors must certify that Iraq's chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs have been destroyed before sanctions imposed on Iraq after its 1990 invasion of Kuwait can be lifted.
On Wednesday and Thursday, the council held a public debate on the Iraq crisis for the first time this year.
More than 60 countries spoke during the debate, with many warning that a new war would add to the suffering of Iraqis and further destabilize the region. Only Britain and Israel endorsed the original U.S. demand.
(AP) - France and Russia were considering a new U.S. compromise for a Security Council resolution on Iraq, with Moscow saying for the first time Friday that it might agree to military action if Baghdad fails to cooperate with weapons inspections. In an effort to end a five-week impasse among the permanent members of the council, the United States, supported by Britain, dropped a demand that a resolution explicitly authorize military force against Iraq.
The five permanent members of the Security Council had been due to debate the draft resolution on Friday but the meeting looked in doubt as French officials continued to review the US text.
There can be no automatic intervention
Jacques Chirac Disagreement is believed to centre upon whether the wording threatens an automatic attack on Iraq in the event of weapons inspectors finding violations of UN rulings and whether such an attack would have to be debated by the Security Council first.
French President Jacques Chirac has denied any conflict with the US but said that his country was opposed to automatic military action.
Chirac is on a visit to Beirut for a summit of Francophone nations "France's position has been clearly expressed by its saying: No, there can be no automatic intervention," he said in a French radio interview. "There is no conflict between the French argument and the American argument or anything of that nature. There's simply a French affirmation of what it believes to be international law and common sense." France led UN states opposed to the original wording of the US draft resolution which approved the use of "all necessary means" against Iraq in the event of violations. : Who backs war? Where key nations stand on Iraq It is now questioning the phrase "serious consequences" in America's revised draft. The US administration believes that any Iraqi interference with the work of weapons inspectors would be a breach of the 1991 Gulf War ceasefire conditions and it has US congressional backing to use force. Final say The BBC's World Affairs correspondent, Mark Doyle, reports from New York that America and Britain believe any sign of a split with their fellow UN Security Council permanent members - France, Russia and China - would send a dangerous signal to Saddam Hussein. Our correspondent says that the US has been pushing for an automatic trigger to attack Iraq and have been consistently opposed by France. Chirac is just... trying to get reconstruction contracts in Iraq Simon, UK Click here to send your comments France also insists on further UN Security Council deliberations in the event of violations as it believes the UN should have the final say. However, the US believes that by that stage it would already have a mandate for war. Russia has indicated that it might agree to the use of military force against Iraq in the event of violations provided the action was approved by the Security Council. But Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov told the BBC that the only aim of the draft UN resolution should be the speedy return of weapons inspectors. The wrangling continues at the Security Council China has also stated that the priority should be in getting Un inspectors back into Iraq to monitor its disarmament. The US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, has warned that President George W Bush will act in America's best interests: "The United States does not need any additional authority, even now, if we felt it was necessary to take action to defend ourselves." 'Unnecessary resolution' Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz insisted on Friday that there was no need for a new UN Security Council resolution and accused weapons inspectors of breaking existing rules before their withdrawal from Iraq in 1998. "If they had complied with these rules, they would have ended their mandate long time ago," he said in Baghdad. Mr Aziz also commended France for its "just, legal and neutral position".
UNITED NATIONS — The United States, France and Russia are close to an agreement on wording for a single U.N. resolution that would spell out the consequences for Iraq if it refuses to cooperate with weapons inspectors, sources have told Fox News.
Three of the five permanent nations of the U.N. Security Council were said to be discussing new language for the resolution, with Moscow saying for the first time Friday it might agree to military action if Baghdad fails to cooperate with weapons inspections.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,66058,00.html The new offer was designed
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.